Afficher la notice abrégée

dc.rights.licenseopenen_US
dc.contributor.authorRIBES, C.
dc.contributor.authorMASQUEFA, T.
dc.contributor.authorDUTRONC, H.
dc.contributor.authorDE SEYNES, C.
hal.structure.identifierBordeaux population health [BPH]
dc.contributor.authorDUPON, Michel
dc.contributor.authorFABRE, T.
hal.structure.identifierBordeaux population health [BPH]
dc.contributor.authorDAUCHY, Frédéric-Antoine
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-10T10:08:20Z
dc.date.available2020-07-10T10:08:20Z
dc.date.issued2019-10
dc.identifier.issn1769-6690 (Electronic) 0399-077X (Linking)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://oskar-bordeaux.fr/handle/20.500.12278/10402
dc.description.abstractEnINTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic knee infection is a severe complication. Confirmed criteria are lacking to choose between one-stage or two-stage prosthesis replacement to treat the infection. The one-stage replacement could lead to a satisfactory control of the infection and to better functional results. METHOD: Retrospective study conducted between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2014. The objectives of this study were to compare the infection outcome and functional results between the one-stage and two-stage replacement procedures. Functional results were evaluated using the IKS score, KOOS score, and SF-12 quality of life score. RESULTS: Forty-one patients underwent a two-stage replacement procedure and 21 patients a one-stage replacement. The average follow-up was 22 months after surgery. The infection was cured in 78% of patients who underwent a two-stage replacement and 90% of patients who underwent a one-stage replacement (P=0.3). The flexion range of motion was significantly better in the one-stage group than in the two-stage group (P=0.04). Results of the IKS score and of the KOOS score were better in the one-stage group. No difference was observed for the SF-12 score. CONCLUSION: The one-stage replacement procedure for periprosthetic knee infection was associated with a similar healing frequency as the two-stage replacement procedure, and with better knee function.
dc.language.isoENen_US
dc.title.enOne-stage versus two-stage prosthesis replacement for prosthetic knee infections
dc.title.alternativeMed Mal Infecten_US
dc.typeArticle de revueen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.medmal.2019.01.013en_US
dc.subject.halSciences du Vivant [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologieen_US
dc.identifier.pubmed30795868en_US
bordeaux.journalMedecine Et Maladies Infectieusesen_US
bordeaux.page519-526en_US
bordeaux.volume49en_US
bordeaux.hal.laboratoriesBordeaux Population Health Research Center (BPH) - U1219en_US
bordeaux.issue7en_US
bordeaux.institutionUniversité de Bordeauxen_US
bordeaux.peerReviewedouien_US
bordeaux.inpressnonen_US
hal.identifierhal-03210791
hal.version1
hal.date.transferred2021-04-28T08:34:51Z
hal.exporttrue
bordeaux.COinSctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.jtitle=Medecine%20Et%20Maladies%20Infectieuses&rft.date=2019-10&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=519-526&rft.epage=519-526&rft.eissn=1769-6690%20(Electronic)%200399-077X%20(Linking)&rft.issn=1769-6690%20(Electronic)%200399-077X%20(Linking)&rft.au=RIBES,%20C.&MASQUEFA,%20T.&DUTRONC,%20H.&DE%20SEYNES,%20C.&DUPON,%20Michel&rft.genre=article


Fichier(s) constituant ce document

FichiersTailleFormatVue

Il n'y a pas de fichiers associés à ce document.

Ce document figure dans la(les) collection(s) suivante(s)

Afficher la notice abrégée